Subject: [stir] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-passport-shaken-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 13:24:02 -0800

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-stir-passport-shaken-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-passport-shaken/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I support Eric's DISCUSS. In addition to points made by Benjamin in that
thread, I think if this document is going to say that threats introduced by
origids "already existed in SIP," it also needs to talk about expectations for
usage of origids in cases were existing SIP features to support anonymous
calling are in use. Presumably callers who enable such features may also not
expect their calling patterns to be linkable.